<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2012 (12) TMI 523 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219508</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal due to the unexplained delay in filing and upheld the rejection of the Sec.40(b) claim by the CIT(A) based on the lack of supporting evidence. The decision emphasized the importance of adhering to procedural requirements and substantiating claims with necessary documentation in tax disputes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2012 13:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=192878" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (12) TMI 523 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219508</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal due to the unexplained delay in filing and upheld the rejection of the Sec.40(b) claim by the CIT(A) based on the lack of supporting evidence. The decision emphasized the importance of adhering to procedural requirements and substantiating claims with necessary documentation in tax disputes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219508</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>